First of all: No, the size of the universe alone says nothing about the actual likelihood of ET life.
Secondly: Irrelevant to the discussion!

Sigh..

First of all: Yes, the size of the universe alone says a lot about the actual likelihood of ET life. Why? It's all about chance. The greater amount of stars = greater chance of a planet being in that perfect location, and with the greater amount of planets out there = greater chance of a perfect planet in a perfect location which equals to life.

Stop looking at it from a conspiracy theory view and look at it from a scientific view (if you can handle that).

And no, its not irrelevant to the discussion, its more relevant then the bullshit you spew out of your keyboard.

Considering the incredibly large expanse of the universe, the possibility of another intelligent bipedal/quadrupedal life form is very likely. I have strong doubts about them visiting Earth, but on the chance of an intelligent life form is near undeniable.

First of all: Yes, the size of the universe alone says a lot about the actual likelihood of ET life. Why? It's all about chance. The greater amount of stars = greater chance of a planet being in that perfect location, and with the greater amount of planets out there = greater chance of a perfect planet in a perfect location which equals to life.

But it's still a figure completely in the dark, so it's pointless to bring this up.

How is it likely? You seem to only be asking me, yet you do not provide why you think my opinion is incorrect.

It's unlikely because of basic thought, it shouldn't require a super indepth explanation just to say that basic reasoning and logic clearly suggests and states that another intelligent lifeform within the universe isn't such a far-fetched idea.

How is it likely? You seem to only be asking me, yet you do not provide why you think my opinion is incorrect.

It's unlikely because of basic thought, it shouldn't require a super indepth explanation just to say that basic reasoning and logic clearly suggests and states that another intelligent lifeform within the universe isn't such a far-fetched idea.

I'm just wondering how you're judging if it's likely or unlikely, like what are the variables? Is it just 'well the Universe is big so there's more of us'? Because that's really unscientific.

I'm just wondering how you're judging if it's likely or unlikely, like what are the variables? Is it just 'well the Universe is big so there's more of us'? Because that's really unscientific.

We've thus far, found existing primitive life forms on other planets even within our galaxy, and considering the incredibly large string of galaxies, it shouldn't be hard to imagine that these lifeforms exist there as well, even perhaps more advanced and evolved. Then again, maybe my opinion is silly and I'm just going off of hopes and bias. But regardless, I stand by my point.

No we have not. You clearly haven't done your research and have no idea what you're talking about!

Looking up a bit after this, and I've found a few cases of bacteria and such!

Unfortunately, most were dismissed/'disproved' afaik. Such as that meteorite from November, 2009.

So perhaps, as I said my opinion is rather dull and overoptimistic, uncited and shitty at best in a lot of people's eyes. I'm not the greatest debater, but following basic reason, it's stupid to assume there's no foreign bacterium or organisms somewhere else in the universe. It's basically the same as saying Earth is the center of the universe.

Ok so if we assume that if conditions such as Earth or close to Earth's have to exist to create life (which is not true in the nearest). The amount of stars in the universe with planets gives us a big chance of conditions such as near here to exist. However, if we assume that the universe isn't generally isotropic then we have a problem

So much information about this has been leaked for like 50 years. Where do you think we get all this information? So many retired army personel who in later years have started to blow the whistle... Only that hardly anyone listen or take them seriously. Just look at this thread. You're using a circle argument.
"If the government hid aliens then surely there would be testimonies/leaks"
"But there are!"
"They're nutcases. They are full of bullshit. Because there is no proof of aliens."
"It's a conspiracy."
"But then there would be leaks!!"

and so forth...

It is widely believed that the Roswell incident back in '47 was our first contact with aliens. Three aliens crashed in their ship in the desert (ie first contact was by accident). But then theories start to diverge as to whether there were any survivors, what happened to the ship and bodies, and when any formal contact with the aliens occured.

But I don't really understand the question. Why is first contact an issue?

Don't you find it a bit suspicious that "first contact" happened very close to a U.S. Air Base and that there were experimental aircraft being tested in the area?

Don't you find it a bit suspicious that "first contact" happened very close to a U.S. Air Base and that there were experimental aircraft being tested in the area?

There's no record of experimental aircrafts being developed/tested there. From all I can tell it was a flight school. And it wasn't classified either, like Area 51.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walker_Air_Force_Base
In other words - not your ideal place to test top secret stuff.

Also they changed their minds a couple of times before settling on it being a high-altitude balloon, officially. Eye-witnessess stick to the original "crashed disc" version. So what was it - experimental aircraft or a balloon?

The crash site being coincidental? There are plentyful cases of UFOs crashing in obscure/random places, for example:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shag_Harbour_UFO_incident
So I don't think it's very "convenient" that one UFO crashed some 60 miles from an air base, of which there are plenty of in the US.

The questions remain: Why did the Air Force first report a flying disc, if it was their own balloon they had sent up? If it was a weather balloon, why did they test it with "passengers"? Why did they report anything at all publically, if the alleged project was classified??

Given how big the universe is, I would consider the complete non-existence of intelligent extra-terrestrial lifeforms very unlikely. But at the same time, I would consider the actual chances of having one alien civilization reach a high enough level of technology to travel through deep space AND find our own civilization very, very thin, for the exact same reasons as why I think an intelligent alien lifeform exists.

There's no record of experimental aircrafts being developed/tested there. From all I can tell it was a flight school. And it wasn't classified either, like Area 51.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walker_Air_Force_Base
In other words - not your ideal place to test top secret stuff.

Also they changed their minds a couple of times before settling on it being a high-altitude balloon, officially. Eye-witnessess stick to the original "crashed disc" version. So what was it - experimental aircraft or a balloon?

The crash site being coincidental? There are plentyful cases of UFOs crashing in obscure/random places, for example:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shag_Harbour_UFO_incident
So I don't think it's very "convenient" that one UFO crashed some 60 miles from an air base, of which there are plenty of in the US.

The questions remain: Why did the Air Force first report a flying disc, if it was their own balloon they had sent up? If it was a weather balloon, why did they test it with "passengers"? Why did they report anything at all publically, if the alleged project was classified??

I think it's obvious we are not being told a key part of this puzzle.

Is it possible that an enemy somehow got a disc-shaped aircraft to near the base, and the government would be too embarrassed that their security was breached, especially if it could create panic?

I'm just wondering how you're judging if it's likely or unlikely, like what are the variables? Is it just 'well the Universe is big so there's more of us'? Because that's really unscientific.

Life is simply complex organic reactions, for basic life the building blocks are pretty well spread throughout the universe. Fuck man we've found gas clouds that contain some of the most complex organic molecules known to occur in nature and in life. Thus, the greater the size of the universe the more places there will be that can support these complex reactions and thus the greater the chance that autonomous life can come into being.

There's no record of experimental aircrafts being developed/tested there. From all I can tell it was a flight school. And it wasn't classified either, like Area 51.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walker_Air_Force_Base
In other words - not your ideal place to test top secret stuff.

That does not remove the possibility of an experimental aircraft being tested.

Also they changed their minds a couple of times before settling on it being a high-altitude balloon, officially. Eye-witnessess stick to the original "crashed disc" version. So what was it - experimental aircraft or a balloon?

Obviously the Air Force would not want their experimental aircraft to be discovered. It makes sense that they would attempt to hide it by claiming it was a weather balloon.

The crash site being coincidental? There are plentyful cases of UFOs crashing in obscure/random places, for example:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shag_Harbour_UFO_incident
So I don't think it's very "convenient" that one UFO crashed some 60 miles from an air base, of which there are plenty of in the US.

The fact that most "UFO sightings" occur in obscure areas points to military involvement, where top secret experiments would be tested in less populated areas.

The questions remain: Why did the Air Force first report a flying disc, if it was their own balloon they had sent up? If it was a weather balloon, why did they test it with "passengers"? Why did they report anything at all publically, if the alleged project was classified??

Because they didn't want people to figure out what they were testing. Someone after realizing that reporting a "flying disk" could compromise the experimental project, they probably changed the story to disguise their blunder.

There's no record of experimental aircrafts being developed/tested there. From all I can tell it was a flight school. And it wasn't classified either, like Area 51.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walker_Air_Force_Base
In other words - not your ideal place to test top secret stuff.

Also they changed their minds a couple of times before settling on it being a high-altitude balloon, officially. Eye-witnessess stick to the original "crashed disc" version. So what was it - experimental aircraft or a balloon?

The crash site being coincidental? There are plentyful cases of UFOs crashing in obscure/random places, for example:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shag_Harbour_UFO_incident
So I don't think it's very "convenient" that one UFO crashed some 60 miles from an air base, of which there are plenty of in the US.

The questions remain: Why did the Air Force first report a flying disc, if it was their own balloon they had sent up? If it was a weather balloon, why did they test it with "passengers"? Why did they report anything at all publically, if the alleged project was classified??

I think it's obvious we are not being told a key part of this puzzle.

If some species can make it the hundreds or thousands of light-years it would take to reach Earth, how are they so incompetent that they always crash?

You know, after hastily responding to your other post, I did some research on the Roswell incident, and I found a lot of things that outright contradict what you are claiming. A lot of information can be found straight from the Air Force report of the incident done in 1994. For instance, the Army Air Force (as it was at the time in 1947) did not, in fact, originally claim that the object was a disk and then later change their story. They, from the beginning, claimed that the object had been the damaged remains of a weather balloon. No corpses or remains, Human or otherwise, were ever found near the wreckage. And the source from which the "flying disk" claims originate reads as follows:

[release]"..The disc is hexagonal in shape and was suspended from a balloon by a cable, which balloon was approximately twenty feet in diameter. ...the object found resembles a high altitude weather balloon with a radar reflector. ...disc and balloon being transported..."[/release]

They always crash? There are very very few reports of crashed UFOs compared to sightings alone. This indicates that they very rarely crash.

Regardless of the proportion of sighting to crashes, the fact that there have been so many UFO crash claims is very suspicious seeing how even after almost 70 years, aliens continue to fail at flying their ships and have crashed hundreds of times, each time leaving apparently obvious evidence of their existence and giving no effort to conceal themselves, contrary to the fact that they are all supposedly in collusion with the government, trying to hide their existence...

Isn't it odd how computers just popped up after 6000 years of not having computers?

And cities too! For 500 thousand years Humans lived as hunter gatherers, and within a few thousand years, we had population centers sprouting all around the globe. I believe aliens are to blame.

Of course, ancient governments also covered up these aliens. They were probably bribed by the aliens to keep the secret. You think Zeus gave King Midas the golden touch? More like ALIENS gave it to him!

I think the problem with people like Rad is the same problem you see with highly religious people, its not that they believe because there's lack of evidence to contradict them but its the fact that they want to believe.

Just like the aliens guy, "Hey, a pyramid! We don't know how they built it with their technology so it must be aliens!" is really similar to "Hey, we don't know why x is like that so it must be God!"

Guys we had major technological advances just after Roswell, you can't explain that shit! It's aliens man!

Nah but really why the fuck would aliens come to earth and not announce their visit? If they can come to Earth then they'll have observed us and realised that as a species we're fucking retarded and would have kept their distance until we had actually became a mature species.

Aliens haven't visited earth, just straight up havent, cause they would have better things to do with their time.

Besides if there are aliens close enough to the Earth to drop in and say hi then why haven't we picked up any radio signals from space that aren't produced by natural phenomena?

Well unless the universe is filled with life, then yeah true they wouldn't bother with us but if they are some super high tech advanced civilization and even if we are a loooooot of light years away then they would still check us out if they had the tech because life is rare (as far as we know)

What the fuck is the point in a journey that dangerous just to sit and look at us from afar?

There is literally no point for them to come and see us and not make contact.

This reasoning is so stupid because:
a) It's impossible for you to think up any scenario where you would want to observe something from a distance instead of jumping right into it (go learn some science).
b) You assume that aliens, ETs, intelligent life developed completely separately from humans, use human logic.

There will never be a single alien species that will dive balls first into an unknown situation with another new intelligent life form, NEVER. It's way too risky and frankly they wouldn't be exceptionally intelligent if they done that sort of shit on a regular basis.

See the thing is, if they are capable of watching us from a distance then they should do that, not fly all the way over and then observe us.

Honestly there's no reason to believe at all, that at any point in the Earths history that we have been visited by aliens, and for anyone who believes they have, I would like to see evidence.

Edited:

Also a good scientist wouldn't jump head first into a situation to learn it, for the simple reason it could be incredibly dangerous.

There will never be a single alien species that will dive balls first into an unknown situation with another new intelligent life form, NEVER. It's way too risky and frankly they wouldn't be exceptionally intelligent if they done that sort of shit on a regular basis.

I get the impression that first you ask why they haven't contacted us, and then you post a perfectly good answer to it yourself? Make up your mind?